Quick Summary of the Nym X Space: Online Safety Act vs. Granite Act
December 11, 2025
Speakers: Preston Byrne (US/UK lawyer, Arkham), Harry Halpin (CEO Nym), Theo Goodman, Colin Crossman
https://x.com/i/spaces/1rmxPvNWXkLGN
Extraterritorial censorship is the core problem
Preston Byrne explained that the UK Online Safety Act, the EU Digital Services Act (DSA) and similar Australian laws are censorship regimes in practice. Their key feature is extraterritorial enforcement – attempts to force US companies and citizens to follow foreign speech rules that directly violate the First Amendment. Even when unenforceable in US courts, these laws still function through intimidation, fines, legal pressure and uncertainty.
Why the UK enforcement strategy is failing
Instead of targeting Big Tech, UK regulator Ofcom went after small, controversial platforms like 4chan, Gab, Kiwi Farms and Sanctioned Suicide. The strategy failed: none of the US companies complied, all enforcement actions were resisted, and 4chan became a strategic test case in US courts. This exposed a fundamental weakness – foreign regulators lack real jurisdiction, while sovereign immunity makes counteraction difficult under current US law.
Granite Act – changing the enforcement math
The Granite Act (Guaranteeing Rights Against Novel International Tyranny and Extortion) introduces two tools:
Shield – foreign censorship orders are explicitly non-binding in the US, and US officials are banned from assisting enforcement.
Sword – Americans can countersue foreign states for attempting censorship, with damages starting at $10M per attempt or up to 3× the threatened fine, stripping sovereign immunity and allowing access to sovereign assets. The aim is deterrence, not endless litigation.
Political momentum
The bill is already filed in Wyoming, with New Hampshire preparing a parallel version and signals pointing to a possible federal bill in 2026. Byrne stressed that if enacted, this could reshape digital sovereignty and free-speech boundaries for decades.
Why defending 4chan matters
Governments always target the least sympathetic platforms first. The logic is simple: if you can protect 4chan from the UK, you can protect anyone. Winning here sets precedents that protect startups, open-source developers, infrastructure providers, privacy tools and mainstream platforms.
Technology as the second line of defense – Nym’s role
Harry Halpin linked legal resistance with technical censorship resistance. Centralized VPNs are easy to coerce and force into logging. Decentralized systems like Nym remove the enforcement target entirely, providing metadata privacy and censorship resistance by design. Law buys time. Technology makes it permanent.
Community Q&A – key points
• Can governments ban VPNs? They can try, but decentralized VPNs are far harder to block or regulate effectively.
• Is this only about the US? No. The US is the leverage point, but the Granite model is designed to be copied globally.
• Does this stop domestic censorship everywhere? No, but it prevents governments from outsourcing censorship to foreign infrastructure and companies.
• What can other countries do? Copy the Granite Act framework and lock pro-speech protections into law while they still can.
Full space text can be found here